Page 126 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

516 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

CASE LAW ON RETROSPECTIVITY/CLARIFICATORY
13. In the case of State Bank of India v. V. Ramakrishnan, (2018) 17 SCC
394, it is observed and held that the presumption against retrospective operation
is not applicable to declaratory statutes. For modern purposes a declaratory Act
may be defined as an Act to remove doubts existing as to the common law, or the
meaning or effect of any statute. Such Acts are usually held to be retrospective.
13.1 In the case of State of Bihar v. Ramesh Prasad Verma, (2017) 5 SCC
665, it is observed and held that any legislation or instrument having force of
law, if clarificatory, declaratory or explanatory in nature and purport, will have
retrospective operation especially in the absence of any indication to the contrary
as to retrospectivity either in parent Act or Rules or notifications involved.
13.2 In the case of Union of India v. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd., (2009) 12
SCC 209 = 2009 (14) S.T.R. 593 (S.C.), it is observed and held that whether a sub-
ordinate legislation or a parliamentary statute would be held to be clarificatory
or declaratory would depend upon the nature thereof as also the object it seeks to
achieve.
13.3 In the case of T.N. Electricity Board v. Status Spg. Mills Ltd., (2008) 7
SCC 353 it is observed and held that a clarificatory order can be given retrospec-
tive effect as it can throw light on substantive provision by principle of contempo-
ranea expositio.
13.4 In the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1, it is ob-
served that the presumption against retrospective operation is not applicable to
declaratory statutes. In determining, therefore, the nature of the Act, regard must
be had to the substance rather than to the form. If a new Act is “to explain” an
earlier Act, it would be without object unless construed retrospectively. An ex-
planatory Act is generally passed to supply an obvious omission or to clear up
doubts as to the meaning of the previous Act. It is well settled that if a statute is
curative or merely declaratory of the previous law retrospective operation is
generally intended. An amending Act may be purely declaratory to clear a mean-
ing of a provision of the principal Act which was already implicit. A clarificatory
amendment of this nature will have retrospective effect.
CASE LAW ON “INTERPRETATION OF FISCAL STATUTES”
13.5 In the case of R.K. Garg v. Union of India (1981) 4 SCC 675, this
Court observed and held as follows :
“8. xxx xxx xxx
The Court must always remember that “legislation is directed to practical
problems, that the economic mechanism is highly sensitive and complex,
that many problems are singular and contingent, that laws are not abstract
propositions and do not relate to abstract units and are not to be measured
by abstract symmetry”; “that exact wisdom and nice adaption of remedy
are not always possible” and that “judgment is largely a prophecy based on
meagre and uninterpreted experience”. Every legislation particularly in
economic matters is essentially empiric and it is based on experimentation
or what one may call trial and error method and therefore it cannot provide
for all possible situations or anticipate all possible abuses. There may be
crudities and inequities in complicated experimental economic legislation
but on that account alone it cannot be struck down as invalid. The courts
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  126